Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of cholangiocarcinoma

  • Published:
Current Gastroenterology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Malignancies arising from biliary tract epithelia, or cholangiocarcinoma, are rare tumors that have a poor prognosis. The incidence of these tumors is gradually increasing in many countries. Recent advances have been made in identifying some of the risk factors, and the need for appropriate classification is emerging. The diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma is often difficult and requires multiple complementary studies. The use of molecular approaches may improve the diagnostic utility of biliary cytology. Treatment of these tumors is complex, and there are many different treatment options. Although surgical resection can be curative, many patients with cholangiocarcinoma are diagnosed at an advanced stage when only palliative approaches can be used. Photodynamic therapy is emerging as a useful modality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Lazaridis KN, Gores GJ: Cholangiocarcinoma. Gastroenterology 2005, 128:1655–1667. Current overview of epidemiology, risk factors, and management of cholangiocarcinoma with a focus on emerging techniques.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shaib YH, El-Serag HB, Davila JA, et al.: Risk factors of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States: a case-control study. Gastroenterology 2005, 128:620–626. Well-conducted epidemiologic study with identification of potential risk factors for cholangiocarcinoma among elderly persons in the United States.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jarnagin WR, Fong Y, DeMatteo RP, et al.: Staging, resectability, and outcome in 225 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg 2001, 234:507–517.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Patel AH, Harnois DM, Klee GG, et al.: The utility of CA 19–9 in the diagnoses of cholangiocarcinoma in patients without primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2000, 95:204–207.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lindberg B, Arnelo U, Bergquist A, et al.: Diagnosis of biliary strictures in conjunction with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography, with special reference to patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Endoscopy 2002, 34:909–916.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Siqueira E, Schoen RE, Silverman W, et al.: Detecting cholangiocarcinoma in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2002, 56:40–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ramage JK, Donaghy A, Farrant JM, et al.: Serum tumor markers for the diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma in primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gastroenterology 1995, 108:865–869.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bjornsson E, Kilander A, Olsson R: CA 19–9 and CEA are unreliable markers for cholangiocarcinoma in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Liver 1999, 19:501–508.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Nehls O, Gregor M, Klump B: Serum and bile markers for cholangiocarcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2004, 24:139–154. Well-summarized overview of serum and bile markers for cholangiocarcinoma.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bloom CM, Langer B, Wilson SR: Role of US in the detection, characterization, and staging of cholangiocarcinoma. Radiographics 1999, 19:1199–1218.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tillich M, Mischinger HJ, Preisegger KH, et al.: Multiphasic helical CT in diagnosis and staging of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998, 171:651–658.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Manfredi R, Barbaro B, Masselli G, et al.:Magnetic resonance imaging of cholangiocarcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2004, 24:155–164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zidi SH, Prat F, Le Guen O, et al.: Performance characteristics of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the staging of malignant hilar strictures. Gut 2000, 46:103–106.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sugiyama M, Hagi H, Atomi Y, Saito M: Diagnosis of portal venous invasion by pancreatobiliary carcinoma: value of endoscopic ultrasonography. Abdom Imaging 1997, 22:434–438.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Tamada K, Ueno N, Tomiyama T, et al.: Characterizationof biliary strictures using intraductal ultrasonography: comparison with percutaneous cholangioscopic biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc 1998, 47:341–349.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim YJ, Yun M, Lee WJ, et al.: Usefulness of 18F-FDG PET in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003, 30:1467–1472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Anderson CD, Rice MH, Pinson CW, et al.: Fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging in the evaluation of gallbladder carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 2004, 8:90–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schoe R, Haefner M, Wrba F, et al.: Forceps biopsy and brush cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of biliary stenoses. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997, 32:363–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Selvaggi SM: Biliary brushing cytology. Cytopathology 2004, 15:74–79.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Farrell RJ, Jain AK, Brandwein SL, et al.: The combination of stricture dilation, endoscopic needle aspiration, and biliary brushings significantly improves diagnostic yield from malignant bile duct strictures. Gastrointest Endosc 2001, 54:587–594.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sirica AE: Cholangiocarcinoma: molecular targeting strategies for chemoprevention and therapy. Hepatology 2005, 41:5–15. Concise overview of the molecular pathogenesis of cholangiocarcinoma. Several potential targets for improving the management of cholangiocarcinoma are outlined.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Itoi T, Shinohara Y, Takei K, et al.: Detection of telomerase activity in biopsy specimens for diagnosis of biliary tract cancers. Gastrointest Endosc 2000, 52:380–386.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kipp BR, Stadheim LM, Halling SA, et al.: A comparison of routine cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of malignant bile duct strictures. Am J Gastroenterol 2004, 99:1675–1681. Description of fluorescence in situ hybridization for the diagnosis of biliary tract malignancy in strictures. This is a promising new approach that has potential for improving the utility of cytology in clinical practice.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yang B, House MG, Guo M, et al.: Promoter methylation profiles of tumor suppressor genes in intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Mod Pathol 2005, 18:412–420.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tsao JI, Nimura Y, Kamiya J, et al.: Management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: comparison of an American and a Japanese experience. Ann Surg 2000, 232:166–174.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Nakeeb A, Pitt HA, Sohn TA, et al.: Cholangiocarcinoma: a spectrum of intrahepatic, perihilar, and distal tumors. Ann Surg 1996, 224:463–473.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Burke EC, Jarnagin WR, Hochwald SN, et al.: Hilar cholangiocarcinoma: patterns of spread, the importance of hepatic resection for curative operation, and a presurgical clinical staging system. Ann Surg 1998, 228:385–394.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kitagawa Y, Nagino M, Kamiya J, et al.: Lymph node metastasis from hilar cholangiocarcinoma: audit of 110 patients who underwent regional and paraaortic node dissection. Ann Surg 2001, 233:385–392.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Okabayashi T, Yamamoto J, Kosuge T, et al.: A new staging system for mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: analysis of preoperative and postoperative variables. Cancer 2001, 92:2374–2383.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Chamberlain RS, Blumgart LH: Hilarcholangiocarcinoma: review and commentary. Ann Surg Oncol 2000, 7:55–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Connor S, Barron E, Wigmore SJ, et al.: Theutility of laparoscopic assessment in the preoperative staging of suspected hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 2005, 9:476–480.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Di Stefano DR, de Baere T, Denys A, et al.: Preoperative percutaneous portal vein embolization: evaluation of adverse events in 188 patients. Radiology 2005, 234:625–630.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jarnagin WR, Shoup M: Surgicalmanagement of cholangiocarcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2004, 24:189–199. Excellent over view of approaches to the surgical management of cholangiocarcinoma, based on an extensive database and broad experience.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cherqui D, Benoist S, Malassagne B, et al.: Major liver resection for carcinoma in jaundiced patients without preoperative biliary drainage. Arch Surg 2000, 135:302–308.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Serafini FM, Sachs D, Bloomston M, et al.: Location,not staging, of cholangiocarcinoma determines the role for adjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Am Surg 2001, 67:839–843.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Pitt HA, Nakeeb A, Abrams RA, et al.: Perihilarcholangiocarcinoma. Postoperative radiotherapy does not improve survival. Ann Surg 1995, 221:788–797.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. McMasters KM, Tuttle TM, Leach SD, et al.: Neoadjuvantchemoradiation for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Am J Surg 1997, 174:605–608.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Meyer CG, Penn I, James L: Liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma: results in 207 patients. Transplantation 2000, 69:1633–1637.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Heimbach JK, Gores GJ, Haddock MG, et al.: Liver transplantation for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2004, 24:201–207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Vauthey JN, Blumgart LH: Recent advances in the management of cholangiocarcinomas. Semin Liver Dis 1994, 14:109–114.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. De Palma GD, Galloro G, Siciliano S, et al.: Unilateralversus bilateral endoscopic hepatic duct drainage in patients with malignant hilar biliary obstruction: results of a prospective, randomized, and controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc 2001, 53:547–553.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Washburn WK, Lewis WD, Jenkins RL: Aggressive surgical resection for cholangiocarcinoma. Arch Surg 1995, 130:270–276.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Hejna M, Pruckmayer M, Raderer M: The role of chemotherapy and radiation in the management of biliary cancer: a review of the literature. Eur J Cancer 1998, 34:977–986.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Harvey JH, Smith FP, Schein PS: 5-Fluorouracil, mitomycin, and doxorubicin (FAM) in carcinoma of the biliary tract. J Clin Oncol 1984, 2:1245–1248.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Cantore M, Mambrini A, Fiorentini G, et al.: Phase II study of hepatic intraarterial epirubicin and cisplatin, with systemic 5-fluorouracil in patients with unresectable biliary tract tumors. Cancer 2005, 103:1402–1407.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Patt YZ, Jones DV Jr, Hoque A, et al.: Phase II trial of intravenous fluorouracil and subcutaneous interferon alfa-2b for biliary tract cancer. J Clin Oncol 1996, 14:2311–2315.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Malik IA, Aziz Z, Zaidi SH, Sethuraman G: Gemcitabine and Cisplatin is a highly effective combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer of the gallbladder. Am J Clin Oncol 2003, 26:174–177.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Knox JJ, Hedley D, Oza A, et al.: Combining gemcitabine and capecitabine in patients with advanced biliary cancer: a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:2332–2338.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Burger I, Hong K, Schulick R, et al.: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in unresectable cholangiocarcinoma: initial experience in a single institution. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2005, 16:353–361.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ortner ME, Caca K, Berr F, et al.: Successful photodynamic therapy for nonresectable cholangiocarcinoma: a randomized prospective study. Gastroenterology 2003, 125:1355–1363. This prospective randomized study of photodynamic therapy for cholangiocarcinoma reports very promising results in improving survival.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Khan SA, Davidson BR, Goldin R, et al.: Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of cholangiocarcinoma: a consensus document. Gut 2002, 51(Suppl 6):VL1-VL9. This document provides an excellent concise overview of a proposed consensus approach to the evaluation of cholangiocarcinoma.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Scott and White Memorial Hospital and Clinic, Texas A&M University Health Science Center, 2401 South 31st Street, 76508, Temple, TX, USA

    Tushar Patel MBChB

Authors
  1. Santosh B. Reddy MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tushar Patel MBChB
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tushar Patel MBChB.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reddy, S.B., Patel, T. Current approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of cholangiocarcinoma. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 8, 30–37 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-006-0061-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-006-0061-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation